Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25927892›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2015

A Bayesian ensemble approach for epidemiological projections.

Tom Lindström, Michael Tildesley, Colleen Webb

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Vote-processing rules for combining control recommendations from multiple models.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. An ensemblemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Use and Misuse of Mathematical Modeling for Infectious Disease Policymaking: Lessons for the COVID-19 Pandemic.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Epidemiologically and Socio-economically Optimal Policies via Bayesian Optimization.Transactions of the Indian National Academy of Engineering : an international journal of engineering and technology · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Essential information: Uncertainty and optimal control of Ebola outbreaks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Validation of Models Used to Inform Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Accuracy and Implications.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016
    Article
  18. Evaluation of new scientific information onEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tom LindströmDepartment of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Department of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America; US National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America; University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Michael TildesleyUS National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America; School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Leicestershire, United Kingdom.
Colleen WebbDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America; US National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical models are powerful tools for epidemiology and can be used to compare control actions. However, different models and model parameterizations may provide different prediction of outcomes. In other fields of research, ensemble modeling has been used to combine multiple projections. We explore the possibility of applying such methods to epidemiology by adapting Bayesian techniques developed for climate forecasting. We exemplify the implementation with single model ensembles based on different parameterizations of the Warwick model run for the 2001 United Kingdom foot and mouth disease outbreak and compare the efficacy of different control actions. This allows us to investigate the effect that discrepancy among projections based on different modeling assumptions has on the ensemble prediction. A sensitivity analysis showed that the choice of prior can have a pronounced effect on the posterior estimates of quantities of interest, in particular for ensembles with large discrepancy among projections. However, by using a hierarchical extension of the method we show that prior sensitivity can be circumvented. We further extend the method to include a priori beliefs about different modeling assumptions and demonstrate that the effect of this can have different consequences depending on the discrepancy among projections. We propose that the method is a promising analytical tool for ensemble modeling of disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBayes TheoremModels, StatisticalAnimalsComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalDisease OutbreaksFoot-and-Mouth DiseaseHumansIncidencePopulation SurveillanceReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificityUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID25927892
PMCPMC4415763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.